On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Mark Eissler <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi. Just a quick reply... > > > Tony Graziano wrote: > >> >> sipx is not designed to be a firewall. >> > > This has nothing to do with firewalls. We run Cisco firewalls and they work > quite well. :) The second interface is strictly for management, monitoring, > imaging, network storage, etc. Understand the project scope. sipx's storage needs are very small and has monitoring (mrtg) and alarms capabilities already. It would be nothing to install a zabbix or nagios agent on the box as well. > Typically, the second (and sometimes third) interface is connected to a > non-routable network and/or VPN. This is an extremely common network > topology so I'm surprised that the sipx project hasn't fully corrected the > shortcoming already, especially since the platform is directed at enterprise > deployments. > I might add that our offices are interconnected across VPNs. That gets rid > of any requirement for excessive public ip consumption and also alleviates > the need to configure NAT for our SIP traffic. As long as we can bridge the > public/private VOIP traffic at our data center we're good to go. > Goodie. > > While the devs might not like the criticism... I think if it's true that > Nortel resolved the issue for SCS500 then I'm not the only one that thinks > this is a design flaw. > I'm not a dev and don't speak for them. I also realize it is, as indicated by the tracker items, a work in progress. I'm sure the dev team would enjoy another hat helping to resolve it. > > Also, just because someone mentions "Asterisk" on this list, it isn't meant > to invite personal opinion about the platform's merits; it's a widely > deployed application that works quite well in installations up to a certain > size and it certainly has proven to be quite flexible over the years. > Indeed, the latest SwitchVox release (4.5) raises the bar by providing an > even greater integration with Polycom hardware. Personally? I just can't > stand the architecture of Asterisk but that's only me being a nerd. > Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even me. :>) Realize your own post was your opinion of the merits of the sipx platform. "This has got to be one of the most ridiculous limitations I've heard of in recent times." In my case, I simply stated, "I don't find TRIXBOX or any * based system high on my list. That's my preference, and I'm free to choose, as you are. At the end of the day, we may have different needs and use different tools to fulfill those needs. At least noon is forcing you to use something you don't want to use." How you would infer that as a statement against another platform's merits is beyond me. > > It's been great seeing the sipx project evolve over time but so far it > seems that I'm continuing to have to hold off on a deployment because one > feature or another is missing. It's awesome that there's a roadmap (more > than most projects have) but then I'm puzzled by some of the priorities... > Again, asking about the features on the users and dev lists is a good place to start. Right now there is a push to get the features and enhancements for the 4.2 release out, which includes replacement of the voicemail system using freeswitch. I'm relatively certain some of the code to address the resolution you wish is being changed drastically, and since noone filed a feature request or voted on one that includes multiple interfaces, then what's the point of developing for something everyone seems to be ok with. "If you don't ask for it, it's more likely not to be anyone else's priority, except yours." I always encourage folks to chat with user or developers before making a tracker request so they can ensure it is concisely worded. For instance, are you trying to get sipx to bind all services (proxy, registrar, etc.) to multiple interfaces? If so, how do you automate the DNS prioritization in the dns wizard, how will the Pre-Flight tool react to the multiple records? sipx relies properly formatted dns records, other sip or voip systems do not. I do not even want to figure out how much complexity would be involved in HA setups. > -mark > > Lastly, I would suggest, as last time, that we all practice making tin foil hats with our feet, in case we are handcuffed or somehow restrained. Humor is good before a cup of coffee.
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
